Home page

Text size

E-mail this page

RANKIN INLET
A Rankin Inlet man charged with murdering his common-law wife in 2004 may get a new trial because a confidential questionnaire he had filled out at the local friendship centre was included as evidence in his 2006 trial, where he was found guilty.

In March, the Nunavut Court of Appeal granted an appeal based upon the defence's argument that the questionnaire unnecessarily tainted the judge's view of the defendant.

In January 2007, Justice Robert Kilpatrick sentenced Adrian VanEindhoven who was 30 at the time of the murder, to life in prison after finding him guilty of second-degree murder in the stabbing death of his spouse, Leanne Irkootee, on April 23, 2004.

Irkootee, 23, was pronounced dead at the Rankin Inlet health centre as a result of a single stab wound from a steak knife that penetrated her heart.

Irkootee also suffered multiple blunt trauma, including bruising to the face, forehead, nose, jaw, inside of her lips and gums, both arms, knees, shins and her back. She had bite marks on her back and neck.

In his ruling, Kilpatrick wrote that the act of stabbing Irkootee was both a continuation and a culmination of the brutal pattern of violence that preceded it.

As a result of the appeal, on July 16, Crown prosecutor Barry Nordin told the Nunavut Court of Justice the prosecution needs more time to figure out how it will move forward.

Kilpatrick, presiding over the appearance, said "I am acutely conscious of the passage of time. The appeal took a long time. This matter has seen a lot of delays unfortunately."

A court date was set for Aug. 13, when the Crown must present its course of action, and whether it will opt for a retrial, as the court of appeal suggested in its decision.

Nordin told Kivalliq News the matter was going before the appeals committee in the Crown's Nunavut Regional Office for a decision on how to go forward.

The evidence that brought about the appeal was the testimony of a co-ordinator and counsellor at the Pulaarvik Kablu Friendship Centre Spousal Abuse Programme, concerning the contents of a questionnaire VanEindhoven had completed with the centre in 2003.

VanEindhoven's answers, given at the time with the assurance of confidentiality, detailed his problems with alcohol and how those problems had led him to violent behaviour in his intimate relationships, and to get into trouble with the law, to the point where it detailed how many times in the previous six months VanEindhoven admitted to committing various forms of psychological, physical, and property abuse.

The main issue in the 2006 trial was whether Irkootee had been stabbed by VanEindhoven, as the prosecution argued, or fallen on the knife, as the defence argued.

The questionnaire had been entered as propensity evidence, which is evidence that has the purpose of illustrating the defendant's tendencies to act a certain way when those behavioural traits are relevant to the case at hand.

The rule with this sort of evidence is its relevance must outweigh its prejudicial nature.

The Crown had argued successfully, in the 2006 trial, this evidence helped shed light on the relationship between VanEindhoven and Irkootee and the domestic context of the death and possible motive for murder.

The defence argued, unsuccessfully at the time, this evidence served only as "poisoning the well" as there was already evidence before the court that VanEindhoven had been previously convicted of assaulting Irkootee, and the addition of this testimony served only to paint VanEindhoven in a bad light.

The Nunavut Court of Appeal agreed the evidence had served more to negatively influence the judge's opinion of VanEindhoven than to provide useful and relevant information to the case at hand.

We welcome your opinions. Click here to e-mail a letter to the editor.